Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
OS X Businesses Operating Systems Apple

Leopard as the New Vista? 734

Posted by Zonk
from the angry-apple-man-scares-me dept.
ninja_assault_kitten writes "There's an interesting rant from Oliver Rist up on the PC Magazine site. He compares the catastrophe that is Vista to the recently released OS X Leopard. While clearly one is a lion and the other a cub, there do appear to be some frustrating similarities. From the article: 'A month of using Leopard with the same software I had under Tiger and the OS has dumped six times. That's six cold reboots for Oliver. Apple isn't even honest enough to admit that Leopard is crashing: The OS just grays out my desktop and pops up a dialog box telling me I've got to reboot. Like the whole thing is my fault. I even snapped a picture of it. After all, I HAD PLENTY OF CHANCES!'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Leopard as the New Vista?

Comments Filter:
  • Obvious (Score:3, Insightful)

    by rm999 (775449) on Thursday November 29, 2007 @10:18PM (#21527827)
    Apple and Microsoft display the same pattern - their products resembles beta for the first few months, and only become mature after a few years. Happened with the iPod, and all successful versions of Windows.

    I never upgrade until the widespread opinion is the product is mature...
    • Re:Obvious (Score:5, Funny)

      by ludomancer (921940) on Thursday November 29, 2007 @10:56PM (#21528153)
      Wow man! You're just like me! I never thought I'd find another Win98SE user out there!

  • Another Perspective (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Alexx K (1167919) on Thursday November 29, 2007 @10:19PM (#21527841)

    I am blind and use a screen reader, and I find Leopard's screen reader, Voiceover, will randomly freeze for a couple of seconds when browsing web pages. It is extremely annoying, but not as annoying as the extremely clunky keyboard interface. Hardly anything is automatically read, you have to use the shitty keyboard interface to find everything.

    Like Microsoft, Apple claims their half-assed screen reader has improved. Like Microsoft, they've hardly done anything.

    NOTE: I don't actually own a Mac, but I have an Apple fanboy friend who owns a Macbook with Leopard.

    • by jellomizer (103300) * on Thursday November 29, 2007 @10:36PM (#21527973)
      My experience I find that Most blind users prefer Linux, or other form of Unix which allows a good command line interface. I am not sure why Apple or Microsoft even really try I can only imagine a windowed interface to be extremely clumsy for a blind user. Even with speech interface.
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Alexx K (1167919)

        You do have a point there. However, there are instances when I'd like using a GUI for tasks such as spreadsheets, word processing, and web browsing (Lynx doesn't cut it for me). Unfortunately, access to GUI's under Linux/Unix is still pretty new, and currently, one only has access to the Gnome desktop.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 29, 2007 @10:21PM (#21527849)
    Since starting to use it, I've had a lot of problems with it, too.

    When it comes to applications, Firefox crashes for no apparent reason. I thought it might have been due to Flash, but it has crashed even on pages without any Flash. And it works fine for other Flash-based apps. This didn't happen on Tiger.

    I've also had Finder just freeze at times. Again, this is something that never happened with Tiger, or even Mac OS 9 for that matter.

    The few times I've used bash at the terminal, it has core dumped on me. Yes, the shell is dumping core. Something about free()'ing already-freed memory.

    Maybe this has something to do with the new features of Objective-C 2.0? I heard from some friends that a lot of Apple's code was rewritten to use the new features. I don't know if this is true or not, but maybe it could explain why the stability we've come to expect from Tiger just isn't there with Leopard? I mean, so many new language features will take a long time to stabilize. So maybe they shouldn't have been used for such core functionality, if that is indeed the case?
  • Not a problem here (Score:5, Insightful)

    by skingers6894 (816110) on Thursday November 29, 2007 @10:21PM (#21527851)
    Upgraded from Tiger - in place upgrade.

    Not a single crash.

    Upgraded to 10.5.1 - still all good.

    But I'm just one guy - and come to think of it - so is this guy.
    • by DurendalMac (736637) on Thursday November 29, 2007 @10:44PM (#21528039)
      Same here. Leopard has run fine. The worst that happened was that I had to update a couple piece of software, which is to be expected.

      That being said, I've seen some real doozies come through the computer shop where I work. Most can be fixed with an Archive & Install, but some are ugly ones that I still can't figure out, like one new iMac that utterly refuses to launch iWork no matter what I do.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Crypto Gnome (651401)
      Hear Hear!
      Ditto!

      Mee Too!
      • Apple MAC PRO 3.0GHz with 8GB RAM
      • 2 x 300GB internal rives
      • 4 x500GB drives in an External Case
      • on a RocketRAID 2322 eSATA RAID card (needed Leopard-ready drives, after the release)

      I use:

      • Aperture
      • Firefox
      • iTunes
      • Google Earth
      • Adobe Photoshop
      • a handful of minor non-Apple programs (Synergy, Skype, Adium, etc)
      • SuperDuper (which is cool, and low-level enough that it might break stuff, but it doesn't support the new cat so I will not run it until there's an update released)

      So admitt

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by cobalt27x (787467) *
      I am also having no problems. I personally have four systems running Leopard and I have absolutely no complaints. (One 'Aluminum' C2D iMac, one 'White Plastic' C2D iMac, an original MacBook Pro with C1D, and a Mac Mini with G4). All of my systems have been happily and speedily going along. No crashes, no headaches.

      I use a wide variety of applications on these systems ranging from off-the-shelf games to command line utilities installed through MacPorts. Therefore, and expectedly, there were a small handful o
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by curunir (98273) *
      Ditto here. My new MBP hasn't had one crash yet.

      My Mac Mini, which was running Tiger, never totally crashed, but applications were incredibly unstable. But after upgrading that to Leopard, I haven't had one application crash on me, let alone the OS crashing.

      Though to be fair, my Boot Camp install of XP hasn't had any issues (running with either Boot Camp or Parallels), though I don't really use that for much more than Netflix WatchNow and the various poker sites that don't support Macs.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Peter Cooper (660482)
      Likewise. I did upgrades on my machines too, and all has been well. Only one minor issue is my girlfriend's MacBook got the commonplace keyboard problem (no response for 10 seconds, randomly) but resetting PRAM seemed to fix that.

      Running a whole suite of apps, lots of technical stuff (lots of compilation, various interpreters, libraries, etc) going on, and Leopard has been good. The interface feels a lot nicer than Tiger, which looks toy like in comparison (can't get used to brushed metal in Safari when I g
  • by Solra Bizna (716281) on Thursday November 29, 2007 @10:22PM (#21527857) Homepage Journal

    I have been using Leopard since 12 hours before it was officially released. I have had two kernel panics. Both panics were my fault. (As in I explicitly loaded a kernel extension that caused the crash. Both times.)

    Three or four of my friends have been using Leopard since it came out and have had no crashes at all.

    My whole family's been on Leopard since it came out and has also had no crashes at all.

    Clearly, LEOPARD HATES YOU!

    -:sigma.SB

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Aellus (949929)
      This is even more evidence that Leopard is just like Vista: A lot of people have problems with it, and a lot of people dont. For the most part, people seem to be able to get by and use it just fine without a single problem. However, there are enough problems with it that people all over the internets are bashing it with no remorse claiming that it is a total flop and that MS/Apple totally dropped the ball. Both OS's follow that pattern. Leopard and Vista both have some problems, yet a lot of people don't h
  • by atari2600 (545988) on Thursday November 29, 2007 @10:22PM (#21527859)
    I was amused and delighted by the article (given my dislike for fanbois and Mac fanbois in general) but i stopped at the following part in the article:

    XP Pro pre-SP1 crashed all the time, and Microsoft owned up to it--mostly. XP Pro post-SP2 crashed once in a while, and we sighed and kept working while Microsoft looked embarrassed and yelled at someone to work faster on SP3

    Now (at work) i have 4 Linux boxes, 1 Solaris workstation and a windows XP machine that i no longer use actively (keep it around for compatibility tests). However i've used XP since it came out in 2000. It didn't crash always pre-SP1, it didn't crash frequently post XP-SP1 and after XP SP2, i've had the box be up for 180 days before i had to power it down for a memory upgrade and then the box was up for 328 days before i moved offices. I am all for Vista bashing - i am all for Mac bashing and once in a while Linux as a desktop smacking but that section above there makes him lose all credibility.

    All i can tell him is L2UseAComputer, tard. Mod me down but you know there's truth in this post.
    • by Phat_Tony (661117) on Thursday November 29, 2007 @10:52PM (#21528121)
      I see. Because you had a computer running the very same operating system that this guy was running, and your computer didn't crash, then you know that there's something wrong with him personally, or he's lying, if he said his computer did crash.

      When I upgrade to Leopard, if it doesn't crash, then I'll know this guy is a loser, because us 1337 Slashdot users know that there couldn't be any differences in the hardware or software or use that could cause one computer to crash and another to be stable when they're both running the same operating system.
    • by KingOfBLASH (620432) on Thursday November 29, 2007 @11:11PM (#21528265) Journal
      All operating systems crash.

      Let me repeat: ALL OPERATING SYSTEMS CRASH

      It all depends on what you're doing.

      Got a fresh install of Windows ME that you only use to play spider solitaire, and that isn't connected to the internet?

      Crash free.

      Got a not so fresh install of Linux / BSD / Solaris where root has done something really stupid?

      Crash prone (and possibly unrecoverable if it's REALLY stupid).

      Anything in between is going to be based on what you're doing.

      Install the wrong drivers / kernel modules / other software that accesses hardware and you'll make any operating system crash prone.

      And since you have many Linux boxen and an crash-free windows box, it's safe to assume you're a power user.

      So, you don't count!

      You probably know what you're doing, and don't do anything stupid.

      The real test is how often does an inexperienced user's computer crash? And, if we gave the author of this article a PC with Windows on it, would it eventually crash more or less? And, since other people don't seem to have this problem, what is causing the crashes (he might be blaming Apple for the work of a bad board for example).

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Xyrus (755017)
      Similar experience here.

      I have had exactly one blue screen using XP, and that was caused by a bad driver. Other than that, 100% uptime across the board. I've had programs crash but the OS remained up.

      On my macbook pro with tiger, I've had 3 crashes, 2 spinning beachballs of death, and one ice screen (frozen plain blue screen) in the past year. Most seemed to have been cause by open source programs (X11 based apps seemed to be particularly flaky), though one instance was caused by a mac update and the other
  • as an apple user... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by datapharmer (1099455) on Thursday November 29, 2007 @10:24PM (#21527885) Homepage
    I concur. Leopard has SERIOUS problems. It is more than a "point upgrade"as the author states and has some nice new features and enhancements, but firewall breaks all sorts of things abd is as annoying as the Vista mother-may-I prompts giving warnings even after applications have been placed on the white list. DHCP doesn't acquire addresses properly and firewall must be disabled, airport turned off then back on for it to work again.

    I've had 2 kernel panics in 2 days (I never experienced a kernel panic under tiger). I have also had the OS go unstable and Finder et al will crash randomly until restart. Final Cut Pro 6.0 crashes all the time doing things as simple moving the timeline. Spotlight crashes and reloads while doing searches sometimes.

    Disk Utility can't repair disk permissions or recognizes them as incorrect when they are not (not sure which).

    Java is completely screwed! No java 6 yet and javascript commands in safari do bizarre things sometimes like launching outside applications such as finder instead of doing what they are intended to do within the application!

    Apple has some serious work to do if they want to keep Leopard installed on users' machines - and they had better do it fast!
    • by CatOne (655161) on Thursday November 29, 2007 @10:56PM (#21528159)
      Okay, so to address your points in order:

      * Yes, Leopard *is* more than a point upgrade. It's a major upgrade. Don't get caught up on the numbering... there are BIG changes under the hood between 10.4 and 10.5. As there were between 10.4 and 10.3. A "point" upgrade is 10.4.3 to 10.4.4. I don't have any crashes with Spotlight but I haven't installed FC Studio 6 yet. Even if I did, I couldn't give it a fair shake as I'm not a video editor.

      * The GUI for the Firewall is totally different than it was in Tiger. And it's really confusing. What's goofy is the Firewall GUI in Leopard is for the *application* firewall, which is completely new, and which does some stuff based on application signatures. It has no control whatsoever on the ports-based firewall, IPFW. IPFW still actually exists and be configured using ipfw rules if you're so inclined (it's straightforward, but non-trivial for those who aren't command-line fans and who don't want to learn about ports, port state, in/out, and UDP versus TCP). This change is very poorly documented. IMO you should leave the firewall GUI off for now.

      * Disk Utilitiy can and does repair permissions. There are a couple applications and things it's not fixing right now, but this is a very small percentage (probably 0.5%) of things. And it's really not much to worry about. The silly thing is that Mac users have come to see "Repair Permissions" as a magic bullet and it's really not. It doesn't fix all that many things, but this is a case of religion (or voodoo).

      * Java isn't screwed, but true you're limited to Java 5 (er, 1.5) for now. How many things do you do which are actually Java 6 only commands? Most apps I use still use 1.3 and *maybe* 1.4.

      Sure, there are bugs. Sure, it's not perfect. But it's 10.5.1. These things take some time, as the betas are tested by tens of thousands, and the GMs are used by millions (soon enough, tens of millions). They'll get fixed, but if you aren't prepared for a couple inconveniences it's ill advised to upgrade to an OS in the first few days or even weeks of its release. It's called "the bleeding edge" for a reason.

      Also perhaps you didn't install 10.4.0. It had similar issues.
  • One man's opinion (Score:4, Informative)

    by dancingmad (128588) on Thursday November 29, 2007 @10:26PM (#21527893)
    Normally I don't reply to these kind of articles, as they tend to be obvious flame bait, but the whole PC Mag article seems very anecdotal. As far as my own experience is concerned, upgrading to Leopard was the easiest OS upgrade I've ever done and I've had pretty much no issues since I upgraded. I've never had the machine crash or freeze.

    The only real nitpicks I have with Leopard are that the UI occasionally seems slower and some of the UI choices are baffling (the menu bar can be grody with some wallpapers, I ended up switching off the dock shelf, and the folder icons are a huge step backwards) and even those nitpicks are worth it to get a UI that is otherwise relatively clean and consistent (under Tiger I was using a UI called Uno. Before upgrading, I uninstalled it, and Tiger's UI is really grating).
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by supun (613105)
      I wouldn't put too much stock in his review. Seems like he's miffed at the Mac advertisement and bitchy because of it.

      He stated, in the video, that he had difficulty setting up Time Machine. All you do is plug in a USB drive, tell Time Machine to use it, tell Time Machine to exclude certain directories if you want, then turn it on, done. It's only got like three preferences. It took little effort setting it up to work over a AFP mounted drive on my Linux box and he can't figure out the most simplest way to
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      Yes, but anecdotal evidence that confirms my preexisting opinion is actually evidence, whereas anecdotal evidence that runs counter to my preeexisting opinion is, well, just a bunch of anecdotes, and you know those don't constitute evidence.

      I've used Win95, 98, 2000, and XP. Though I hated the aesthetics of XP, I had problems with none of them. I've used Linux, and it too did what I wanted, minus being able to install some software on some distros (probably attributable to my own igorance). I've had a

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 29, 2007 @10:29PM (#21527911)
    And it never cras
  • by jellomizer (103300) * on Thursday November 29, 2007 @10:31PM (#21527927)
    Some Differences as well.
    Vista was Years Late Leopard was Months Late.
    Vista had these problem for almost a year now. Leopard has only been out for a month

    Yes Leopard isn't as Bullet proof and free of problems as Apple admits. I had a failed upgrade where I needed to erase my disk clean to get it to work. And after that I still have some minor problems... But the problems are minor and they remind me of an older version of the OS... Codename Tiger. Yes when Tiger was released it had a slew of minor glitches and bugs just like Leopard did.

    When Tiger was released Apple was still using Power PC Processors, By the time Intel Systems were released and huge amounts of people were migrating to Apple Tiger was Well in the Mid Cycle where most of glitches were cleared. So most people are use to the solid Mid-Cycle OS. But Tiger had a bunch of glitches, also Panther, Jaguar. When they were in the early Pre 10.x.4 release. It happens in early releases. Similar things happen in Linux too, but the Linux Zealots minimize it just like the Apple Fan Boys do. Stating it is the problem with 3rd party software or there are super simple workaround, etc...

    Also there is the issue of the greater number of Mac Users, just the fact that more people are using the OS there is more bugs that are found by users who don't know to fix them. For example I had to hard reboot my Mac this week because of some glitch with Parallels, Going to sleep in middle of a disk write on a USB disk, While asleep the USB Disk was unplugged and when it returned it didn't want to completely wakeup like the program was trying to write to the disk (this may have happened in Tiger too, I was doing something I rarely do). But what happened was the disk got corrupted so things were running poorly. So I rebooted in Single user mode and did an fsck on my disk and fix the problems. Easy for a Unix/Linux/Mac Expert. But if they are a newbie use to using windows this would cause them to reinstall the OS. Many of the people using the older versions of OS X where Well experienced with Macs, and a lot of the Newcomers in the PPC days were people converting from Linux to Macs. Today Macs have a wide base not at all prepared for handling new version bugs.

    Things are not as bleak as Vista is, it is actually normal stuff. We just have forgotten it over time.

  • by greenguy (162630) <estebandidoNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Thursday November 29, 2007 @10:33PM (#21527945) Homepage Journal
    ...Ubuntu is looking better all the time. On seven machines over three years, it's crashed once on me. And I'm pretty sure that was a hardware thing.
  • by acvh (120205) <{moc.sragicsm} {ta} {keeg}> on Thursday November 29, 2007 @10:40PM (#21528017) Homepage
    I've been using OS X since the .0 release, and this is the first time that I regret an upgrade. They made many little changes to little things that drive me crazy. Moving menu items just because they can, redesigning icons to be unreadable, adding features that are useless, etc.

    I have had the feeling that Apple went a little Microsoft with Leopard.
  • by log0n (18224) on Thursday November 29, 2007 @10:46PM (#21528065)
    Macbook Pro 17 (2.33 C2D) with
    Vista (160GB internal)
    Leopard (500GB external FW800)
    3 additional external USB Drives (~ 1TB of space)
    1 USB DVD burner

    I've never had a crash, all of my software has worked perfectly. Of course, I did do a fresh install and selectively moved my old programs back - rather than an Upgrade. 0 problems.
  • by mosch (204) on Thursday November 29, 2007 @10:52PM (#21528125) Homepage
    In my experience nearly everybody who complains about Leopard being unstable is running some sort of unsanity app (or the logitech drivers). Nobody else really has a problem.

    As for the rest of his article, it seems pretty bullshit to me.

    Vista Similarity #1: He claims that it's unstable. Most people disagree, a small but extremely vocal group agrees.

    Vista Similarity #2: He whines about graphics overload, but then references things that work on even ancient low-end Macs with shitty graphic cards, and claims that everybody is showing them off. I don't think they are.

    Vista Similarity #3: He tries to draw equivalence between putting basic network settings three menus deep and Apple deciding that if the dock is on the bottom, that it should have a subtle reflection. Then he complains Apple's new "Cover Flow" is good enough for him, and thus Quick Look was unnecessary. Perhaps he could try not using it, then. To each their own, y'know.

    Vista Similarity #4: He claims that Leopard drops packets and loses connections. I have a bunch of Leopard machines on both wired and wireless networks and have seen absolutely no evidence that this is true. He also claims that SMB shares come and go. Again, I'm on networks with SMB shares and have seen absolutely no evidence that this is true.

    Vista Similarity #5: He tries to claim that time machine is awful, because it does file-level, not block-level incrementals, it doesn't work on network shares by default, and it defaults to backing up the whole system. Time Machine could use improvement, but it's useful and it will get a *lot* of people backing up their machines for the first time in forever.

    Honestly, #5 is the only complaint that has any air of authenticity to me (I've had similar complaints), but it's not like it's a horrific detriment.

    There are two options here:
    Option 1) This is Ziff-Davis MSFT flamebait.
    Option 2) The author of the piece is an idiotic fuck who screwed up his install.

    My money is on Both.
  • Quicktime 7.3 (Score:5, Insightful)

    by localman (111171) on Thursday November 29, 2007 @10:59PM (#21528183) Homepage
    I don't know about Tiger (haven't upgraded yet) but the recent Quicktime 7.3 update is a pile of crap.

    I'm not a power user, and I really just use Quicktime for porn, but it definitely took a major step backwards in this release: the select/copy/paste functionality has been removed from most movie types. Also the A/V controls (brightness, contrast) no longer work on many formats. These were things that _worked_ in 7.2 and have been _disabled_ in 7.3. I don't know what they're trying to do, but it seems like they're trying to make Quicktime completely useless. Those little features were the only reason I used Quicktime at all (instead of VLC, for example).

    Poking around online to try and find a downgrade path, I found that a lot of Final Cut users were totally screwed by this update as well. And the downgrade path is to reinstall the OS from scratch and selectively update around Quicktime 7.3.

    Meh... Apple is doing a lot of things right. And they're doing a lot of things wrong. I'd like to see them understand which is which, and hold on to the right things and work on improving the wrong things. Is that really too much to ask?

    Bugs and such I understand, but who the hell thinks it's a good idea to disable existing functionality?

    Cheers.
  • by jpellino (202698) on Thursday November 29, 2007 @11:06PM (#21528233)
    iBook G4 & iMac G5.
    Painless.
    No kernel panics.
    Reboots only from installs who demanded it.
    I miss classic, but I'll get over it.

  • panic.log (Score:5, Insightful)

    by sockonafish (228678) on Thursday November 29, 2007 @11:10PM (#21528261)
    This guy needs to post his kernel panic log. I'm curious to see what's causing so many panic events.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Rosyna (80334)
      Indeed. They're so quick to complain about a problem and usually unwilling to do anything to try to solve their problem.
  • Anecdotes (Score:3, Insightful)

    by wyldeone (785673) on Thursday November 29, 2007 @11:14PM (#21528297) Homepage Journal
    Since that's just anecdotal evidence, here's some more. I upgraded my C2D MacBook in place to Leopard about two hours before the official release date in my time zone (thanks, FedEx). I have had a total of two kernel panics since then relating to my wireless driver, but the problem seems to have been fixed since 10.5.1. Also, Time Machine refused to work with my drive for some reason until 10.5.1. But besides those issues, it's been completely smooth. And another difference between Vista and Leopard: Leopard is actually faster on my hardware than Tiger was.
  • by joshv (13017) on Thursday November 29, 2007 @11:18PM (#21528339)
    As bad as Vista's been, it's never crashed on me. 6 times in a month? Dude, get a Dell.
  • Worthless chatter (Score:5, Insightful)

    by rueger (210566) on Thursday November 29, 2007 @11:36PM (#21528497) Homepage
    One thing I'll say for Windows users - if you say you have a problem, someone will always pop up and say "Yeah, me too, and this is how to fix it."

    Linux geeks still tend too much to attack the newcomer, or shout "Read the friggin' man pages!" Still as a community they are maturing and learning to help people rather than flame them.

    Make a complaint about an Apple product though and you run headlong into a wall of denial a mile high, with everyone either claiming that your problem does not exist, that you're an idiot when you point out some of the more bizarre UI choices Apple makes, or most frighteningly, arguing that any deficiency, no matter how severe, is somehow actually a wonderful feature.

    I think that Apple users are doing themselves a disservice by not holding Apple to a higher standard. By pretending that hardware or software issues don't exist, and by attempting to shut down those who raise legitimate complaints, they allow Apple far too much latitude to do the same.

    This will of course be modded as troll or flamebait by the first fanboy who reads it.
    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by martinX (672498)

      Make a complaint about an Apple product though and you run headlong into a wall of denial a mile high,

      WE DO NOT

      You idiot.

      --------------- That should earn me loyalty points on macfanboi.com :-)
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by sl3xd (111641) *
      You know, it's funny - You shine a spotlight on "bizarre" UI issues that Apple made, yet quietly sweep Vista's under the rug. And Linux geeks have been, in my experience, the most helpful of all computer users. The only people who shout RTFM are either tweens or people with the maturity of one.

      Given Mac's heritage in graphic design (ie. the people who stuck with apple from '95-2000), it's not surprising to hear designer after designer lamenting decisions they don't agree with.

      The new dock appearance has h
      • Re:Worthless chatter (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Stevecrox (962208) on Friday November 30, 2007 @03:54AM (#21529899) Journal
        Nice in depth review of Vista there, some corrections if you don't mind. The Cancel or Allow thing only appears when a program requires admin rights for me the only time I see this is when I'm installing a game or driver. Fraps does also require it but it does have good reason to want admin rights. I agree with the model I don't want ever application on my PC to need admin rights. Vista DRM layers are one of the great myths, they did contribute to the driver isue that Nvidia/ATi had but unless your planning on running DRM media (some of us never will) they don't effect your pc in anyway.

        I like the UI differences Vista has made the only bad choice as I see it is placing the network sharing centre behind the network connections screen placing Device manager straight into the control panel was a brilliant idea and the re arrangement of the user folders helps seperate things out.

        Vista is working on millions if not billions of computer configurations its biggest problems have been drivers and as far as I can tell those driver issues are slowly being phased out. Mac's are supposed to "just work" and yet there is a strong vocal group claiming the latest release is causing them major issues. Microsoft may have a good excuse for why my scanner made by a small company six years ago doesn't work on Vista x64 (actually someone pointed me at anouther driver and it now does) or the fact that Riven won't install (10 year old game.) Whats apple's excuse? They control all the hardware so there are only dozens of configurations and talking with the big companies who produce software for your platform can't be that hard. My own expearence is a little different if you have an issue with windows there will be someone else who's had it and hopefully a work around/fix. If there isn't a workaround you'll find people squatting on a companies forum moaning until there is. Linux seems to me to have split into two camps the first is highly friendly (Ubunutu camp) and they are helpfull. The second is the old school linux camp, this is made up of people who believe the command line is the only interface a person should use and will flame you if you ask why you have to go through it rather than a wizard (my favorite being make one yourself.) Its the sole reason I'll only try Ubunutu because I know I could probably get help if I needed it. Don't get me wrong many projects are getting better but they seem to be the projects tied to (or come preloaded with) Ubunutu
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by iphayd (170761)
      The problem is that without evidence, Mac users will discount the problem as your fault (which in our experience it generally is).

      Now, if he were to have provided Panic logs (which are written and sent to Apple after every crash, with your approval of course), we would be quick to tell him what his general problem. Without the logs, we could go ahead and try the "well if 'a' doesn't work, then try 'b' routine", but I have better things to do with my day*.

      Now, with that said - Kernel Panics _generally_ say
  • by jht (5006) on Thursday November 29, 2007 @11:39PM (#21528521) Homepage Journal
    I put Leopard on my Santa Rosa MacBook Pro on day 1. Almost no real issues, zero crashes, and overall stability seems much better than it did under Tiger. Here's what I noticed as issues:

    I had messed up my Keychain config many versions and computers ago, which was faithfully migrated from Mac to Mac. Leopard broke it (basically, my keychain was named for my user shortname, not "login"). I renamed the keychain, logged out and back in, and all was well.

    VPN configs didn't migrate the authentication info properly because Internet Config is no longer the tool that manages the connection. Not a problem for most, but I have 23 different clients I use VPNs to connect to. Easily fixed.

    I didn't use any InputManagers other than Saft/PithHelmet, so that was no biggie. And that combo works now.

    When the Mac first wakes up and is scanning for a network connection, the mouse is kind of jerky. It lasts a few seconds.

    All in all, I've seen remarkably few bugs for a .0 release from Apple. I've been very encouraged. Granted, there are some design issues in my opinion (I don't like the new Dock, Stacks are a clever but broken idea, etc.), but those aren't bugs so much as features I don't like too much. But I think Leopard is mainly Good Stuff.
  • no problems here (Score:3, Insightful)

    by lucas teh geek (714343) on Friday November 30, 2007 @12:06AM (#21528701)
    I've got a Powerbook, a MacBook and a Hackintosh (965p/nvidia/pc_efi), all running leopard. I havent seen a crash yet. It's fun to sensationalize when you're having problems; but assuming that everyone else is having them too, and making comparisons to vista just makes you look like a fool. perhaps Olivers ram has gone bad or something?
  • Potential Dump Fix (Score:4, Informative)

    by chillybasen (895218) on Friday November 30, 2007 @12:13AM (#21528745)
    I've been getting dumps too. You can view the dump logs at /Library/Logs/PanicReporter/ Mine kept happening with "current thread: LCCDaemon" which I found out was logitech (my wireless keyboard) I updated to their most recent version and haven't dumped yet *crosses fingers*
  • by rtobyr (846578) <toby@@@richards...net> on Friday November 30, 2007 @12:20AM (#21528803) Homepage
    I used to have the exact same problem. Ever since I applied this fix [apple.com] to X11 for the Gimp.app problems, I haven't had any more crashes.
  • by gujo-odori (473191) on Friday November 30, 2007 @01:59AM (#21529331)
    Within my overall employer, there are over 4,000 Mac users (a minority still, but growing), and within my particular business unit, almost the entire engineering division is Mac, and the few that aren't are mostly FreeBSD. A few Linux users and even fewer Windows users. In fact, the guy in the cube next to me, who just refreshed to a Mac, may have been the last one. Among those 4,000 people, quite a few have upgraded to Leopard already, and I've seen their discussions of various issues on our very high-traffic internal Mac mailing list.

    Certainly, there have been some issues, but nobody has reported the level of crashes that he's been seeing. I think his unfortunate experience is an edge case.

    That many crashes is, IMO, not really acceptable, especially for a *nix-based OS, but I don't think the Vista comparison is very apt. For starters, in TFA he says their own reviewer recommends not upgrading to 10.5.1. Pretty much everyone who already installed Leopard where I work has upgraded to the latest release, and the reports I hear are that it has made all problems better. Instead of listening to his reviewer, he should update.

    If you're getting the idea that I'm still on Tiger, you're right. I know better than to install a .0 release of a new major version of an OS until it's been well flogged in the real world and a bunch of updates are out :-) Although, my colleagues who are on Leopard are happy with it, though. I haven't heard anyone say they wish they hadn't done it. My important Linux systems are still on Kubuntu Feisty, too, just in case. Gutsy seems very stable on the test machines, though.

    The second point on which the Vista comparison fails is that unlike Vista, Leopard offers a number of compelling features that make people want to upgrade. Vista has been out a lot longer than Leopard, but I'd be very surprised if Leopard doesn't already have a higher percentage of upgraders than Vista has. XP Users seem to be sitting tight, for the most part. Among Tiger users, it's not a question of upgrading or not, but of how soon. The reason most XP users are not upgrading is they see no compelling reason to do so. Most of what Vista added is eye candy, and it has some downsides in the form of annoying security dialogs and a lot more DRM than XP has.

    Third, unlike Vista, Leopard didn't have to shed its most compelling features in order to ship. Vista was supposed to come with wonderful new technologies like WinFS, which was not only dropped from Vista, but has been completely dropped as a standalone product. A rumor went around that XFS would be the Leopard file system; that turned out to be just a rumor. And it is available in Leopard, it's just not the default file system. All the really cool stuff that was supposed to be in Vista mostly isn't. There are those who say the security model is better (and maybe it is, although those annoying dialogs are worse than useless), but what people mainly see in Vista is eye candy. Eye candy that takes a lot more horsepower to really make use of. Even there, Vista fails it compared to Leopard (or even Tiger) in terms of looks.

    And that's without even getting started on functionality, reliability, ease of use, and consistency. For all of its .0 release faults, Leopard is still ahead of Vista, there, too.

    Finally, what may be the biggest difference of all between Vista and Leopard: a year from now, Leopard will have achieved significant adoption in the Mac user base. I'll go out on a limb and say that a year from its release, Leopard will not only have a greater percentage of the Mac user base than Vista has of the Windows user base when it reaches 1 year of general public release on Jan. 30 2008, but that one year from its release, Leopard will have a greater percentage of the Mac market than Vista has of the Windows market at *two* years from its release.

    That last may sound like a fanboy statement, but it's really not. It's just recognition of the facts that Mac users, unlike X
  • Azureus (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Nexum (516661) on Friday November 30, 2007 @02:46AM (#21529603)
    This guys only problem (that he really rails about) is a kernel panic caused by Azureus (and some Apple bug in the networking stack. This is terrible, yes, but it's a single (bad) bug that he's seeing. He just doesn't know what's causing it so he attributes it to the general bugginess of Leopard. I kow this because this is the problem I had, and have spent onsiderable time chasing the Apple discussion forums and my friends to nail it down. Google 'Leopard Azureus Kernel Panic' for more info. It's a serious and really annoying bug for sure, but it's **one** bug. Leopard != Vista.
  • by PhotoGuy (189467) on Friday November 30, 2007 @04:13AM (#21529971) Homepage
    While I think it's laughable to call it a failure at all, especially a failure on the order of Vista, Leopard, as released, does have a number of disappointments for me. I expect them to be automatically fixed in a software update before long, which is far less painful than a massive SP2 or whatever. Here's what I've found:

    Some application incompatibility; most Softphones I've tried won't connect to their server. X-Lite won't, and after pointing the finger to Apple (and somewhat rightfully so), have grudgingly stated they will come out with an update for it. But what magical thing could they be using on a TCP/IP stack that would suddenly break??? Something weird must have changed at quite a low level. (The free SJPhone, which works with Vonage, does seem to be one of the rare ones that does work, which will do for now.)

    While Spotlight does offer more features and flexibility now, it does come with a performance penalty. I seem to get reindexing and indexing more often than before, slowing down the system.

    General system performance seems more sluggish, and boot times a fair bit higher than Tiger. Things like Expose' seemed a little jerkier than in Tiger. (Although this seems a bit better lately, perhaps 10.5.1 update helped this.)

    I had one program (Azureus) that wrote to syslog with a bunch of exceptions; Leopard now keeps its syslog in a database (/var/log/asl.db). When this file got large due to Azureus, syslogd suddenly started taking up 99% of the CPU, dragging down the system. It took awhile to chase this one down, having to remove asl.db and kill syslogd (so it auto-restarted). That's a pretty sloppy hole for a consumer OS, in my opinion. (Although one could partially blame Azurues/Java for dumping excessive amount of exceptions to syslog in the first place.)

    I've seen my first OSX crashes with Leopard, as well. The were all centered around plugging/unplugging USB devices; in this case, a dying/dead USB MP3 player. Yes, the player was not responding well (bad ram), but it's no excuse for the USB driver bringing down the system. I haven't seen this repeated, so maybe it was isolated to that one bad device, or maybe the 10.5.1 update fixed it.

    I have seen one or two occasions where the system just got so sluggish and unresponsive that I had to reboot. Rebooting to make the system run better was unheard of in Tiger.

    Adobe Professional's PDF virtual printer thingy doesn't work in Leopard. Adobe has acknowledged this, and promised an update early in the new year. Ugh. Thankfully OS X's print dialog has a save-to-pdf option, which will do for now, although I find it's not quite as good generated PDF content as Acrobat printer produces. (Sometimes, hauling things into Acrobat, then optimizing/saving them, works out okay.)

    iWork's "Pages" consistently crashed whenever I tried to edit a table (unless I kept the mouse *extremely* still after clicking in the table, d'oh). An auto update a couple of weeks after Leopard's release seems to have fixed this one nicely, though.

    There were a couple of low-levelish kernel extensions that no longer worked for me, but that's not terribly surprising in a major upgrade, and they were nothing core to my work, just curiosities.

    Mounting Windows shares seems to be a bit less reliable than before. Some times it won't connect, and once or twice I had to reboot because finder was wedged trying to mount a share, and I couldn't even relaunch Finder. Not great. But things seem to be working better lately (maybe 10.5.1 helped that).

    All that being said, I was amazed at how smooth the update from Tiger went; coming from the Windows world, I expected a reinstall to be the only feasible upgrade option. The upgrade to Leopard, however, went off without a hitch. (I did extensive backups, and a test install on an external drive, being so paranoid of losing my stuff in the upgrade, but it wasn't needed, it seems.) Almost everything worked, except for the bits mentioned above. Parallels was one app
  • by Arcturax (454188) on Friday November 30, 2007 @08:50AM (#21531617)
    Ok, I have a dual 1.25 ghz G4 (1.5 gb ram) and I had some rather upsetting behavior when I first got the thing. Main thing was that the whole system would just stop, totally frozen from about 1-2 minutes. I also saw my first Kernel Panic in over 2 years 10 minutes after a clean install. Another issue was when Firefox would beachball, it would beachball any other application that had a text box in it at the same time, which was enormously frustrating. Then there was the whole moving could lose files thing. I was very glad I had backed my stuff up to DVD before the upgrade.

    But 10.5.1 fixed all of those problems and I've only had a few small nagging ones or annoyances (I really hate stacks and wish I could turn it off for one). Now my system actually seems FASTER than when I had Tiger. The finder in particular is a lot snappier and my machine, while still not as noticably snappy as a new Intel based mac, is still snappy enough friends of mine have refused to believe the machine is 5 years old until I proved it to them. Then they were quite impressed!

    The remaining problems I have seem to be application related. Some things like MT newswatcher lock up after I post, or freeze in inconvenient places. I had a copy of some open source software that was screwing up this way (I had downloaded the binary) but when I pulled down the source and recompiled it, it worked just fine, so I suspect that a lot of application problems are because the developers have not yet recompiled using the latest XCode for Leopard. While you shouldn't see that kind of incompatibility often in my opinion, given the radical changes Apple made to the OS and pulling out all vestiges of Classic, I can see maybe why some carbon apps in particular might need a recompiling to keep them from having issues.

    I am sure there are more bugs to be squashed, but I think Apple will get them in time. 10.5.1 came pretty fast on the heels of the release and 10.5.2 is probably going to hit next month and kill the next batch and maybe the one after. By about 10.5.3 or so, I suspect things will be back more or less to the stability we had with Tiger. So give Apple a break, there was a lot of rewiring going on in Leopard, way more than you can see just by looking at the eye candy and Time Machine. It will take a bit of time to get everything perfectly smooth again.

Vitamin C deficiency is apauling.

Working...